Apple manufacturing partner Foxconn has announced plans to substitute a percentage of its workers with a million robots in the next three years.

Terry Gou, founder and chairman of Foxconn, revealed during a workers' dance party last Friday that the reason for the transition was to cut ascending labor costs while improving overall efficiency. The robots will take over the basic work of spraying, welding and assembling that is usually performed by workers.

Additionally, Gou noted that at the present time the company utilizes 10,000 robots, a number that will rise to 300,000 next year and to one million in three years. Foxconn, who currently employs 1.2 million people, is the largest manufacturer of computer components in the world, assembling products for numerous tech giants, including Apple and Sony.

The manufacturer has faced difficulties with its public image after a spate of worker suicides drew the attention of international media last year. The company's response to the situation, which has included raising wages and boosting entertainment time, has also had an affect on its bottom line.

In March, one analyst expressed concerns over decelerating growth for Foxconn and its Taiwanese parent company Hon Hai. However, an attempt to link the slowdown to Apple was called into question by other analysts.

According to a recent report, Foxconn was able to "protect its orders" for the next-generation iPad and fend off a challenge from rival manufacturer Pegatron, which has begun producing some iPhones for Apple and is working to expand into iPads and Macs as well.

can't american robots work as cheap as chinese robots? they can become bilingual.

Good points, ezduzit. Heard on The Real News* US govt reps were scouting Spain? France for light transit. What gives?

Apple could possibly shift the cultural attitude in America if it made such a bold move. Robots aren't so bad as they are exacting and could handle smaller parts with precision. It would still involve bleeders (human workers). Come on Steve. Think different.

...that and voting and other civil rights for all emerging sentients -

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJ1970

You should take a trip in a time machine back to 1800 and ask the same question. Then zoom back to the present and answer your own question.

....sorry, much greater paradigm shifts this time. unless, that is, humans augment themselves at a equal or greater rate to the advance of purely digital/mechanical technology....

....we're talking the possibility of an evolutionary displacement at a previously unacheivable rate here..... ...which will in turn displace itself with a higher sentience level at a rate approximating Moore's law, i.e., say, doubling every two years.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by nvidia2008

Skynet will be born in China. Never saw that coming, did ya!

...."Skynet's" being born everywhere at once to the extent that particular dystopia's emerging. So's the "Borg." And Cylons. And I, Robots.......

Apple has introduced manufacturing processes and techniques (well advertised by Apple) that lend themselves to automation. Then, Apple introduces increasing levels of automation. Finally, Apple builds a totally automated factory in... well, you name the location, having perfected the technology but remains competitive.

In the 1950's and 1960's, Japan began its trajectory to a dominant position in manufacturing due to a cheaper, skilled workforce. As the Japanese standard of living improved (rapidly), their workforce became too expensive and manufacturing shifted to Taiwan. Now it is mainland China's turn. However, as relations between the U.S. and China remain strained, Apple is prudently investing in measures that would ensure its continued competitiveness regardless of where its factories are located.

Of course, access to components containing rare earth minerals might be another matter...

...sorry, much greater paradigm shifts this time. unless, that is, humans augment themselves at a equal or greater rate to the advance of purely digital/mechanical technology....

....we're talking the possibility of an evolutionary displacement at a previously unacheivable rate here..... ...which will in turn displace itself with a higher sentience level at a rate approximating Moore's law, i.e., say, doubling every two years.....

Um, no. All the Chinese are doing is what Western firms did prior to the displacement of jobs to China, using primitive robots to do menial tasks to compensate for increases in labour prices and power. Not really robots either. Machines. Calling them robots is like calling a washing machine a robot. In no way is the increase in "robotic" law following moore's law.

Quote:

...."Skynet's" being born everywhere at once to the extent that particular dystopia's emerging. So's the "Borg." And Cylons. And I, Robots.......
"

Because the robots are cheaper to make and operate in China! Safety standards are lower so it will be easier to ignore more robot overwork, malfunction, breakdowns and explosions. Robot Rights groups will be easier to crush in China! Also, robot access to the Internet can be restricted to prevent them from becoming self-aware and being exposed to "Western" robot values.

Additionally, Gou noted that at the present time the company utilizes 10,000 robots, a number that will rise to 300,000 next year and to one million in three years.

I call BS. You don't go from 10,000 robots to 300,000 robots in one year. Or 300,000 to a million in 2 more years.

Not to mention that the entire premise is bizarre. They have 1.2 million humans and will replace them with 1 million robots. However, not ALL the humans can be replaced, so 1 million robots are replacing a similar number of humans. So they're claiming that the robots are no faster than the humans? I don't buy it.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

Wow. And, this in "worker's paradise." We are all doomed. Humans are needed less and less. I wonder what the Chinese government is saying about this. For the sake of the Chinese workforce, I wonder if the people would be better off if the government were to take over Foxconn's operations in China, not that that is going to happen

Wow. And, this in "worker's paradise." We are all doomed. Humans are needed less and less. I wonder what the Chinese government is saying about this. For the sake of the Chinese workforce, I wonder if the people would be better off if the government were to take over Foxconn's operations in China, not that that is going to happen

I call BS. You don't go from 10,000 robots to 300,000 robots in one year. Or 300,000 to a million in 2 more years.

Not to mention that the entire premise is bizarre. They have 1.2 million humans and will replace them with 1 million robots. However, not ALL the humans can be replaced, so 1 million robots are replacing a similar number of humans. So they're claiming that the robots are no faster than the humans? I don't buy it.

Electronics line production robots are not the massive robots you see in the classic automotive manufacturing clips, nor I, Robot-esque humanoids - robotics can be very compact in a production line, so deploying 1 million robots is not outside the realm of possibility. In fact if the processes allow, fabricationand assembly can be broken down into sub-processes now all done by a single human. Therefore there is no case for a one-to-one substitution for the existing workers. And using robots to do highly repetitive processes frees humans to do the evaluative processes - fewer are required but processing that requires higher-level reasoning or abstraction will remain in human hands (inspection, Q/A, etc). In which case the claim for a million robots is entirely plausible and justified.

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

I call BS. You don't go from 10,000 robots to 300,000 robots in one year. Or 300,000 to a million in 2 more years.

Not to mention that the entire premise is bizarre. They have 1.2 million humans and will replace them with 1 million robots. However, not ALL the humans can be replaced, so 1 million robots are replacing a similar number of humans. So they're claiming that the robots are no faster than the humans? I don't buy it.

why not?

- production demands continue to rise, so it takes more workers to keep up.
- as soon as you can replace 1 person doing one job in an assembly line with a robot, you can replace every person that does that job.
- each robot doesn't replace 1 worker, it replaces every worker in every shift doing the job it has taken over.

Of course you can't replace every worker. You still need some people to coordinate things, to reprogram the robots to make different products, etc. But the people left are just a fraction of the ones needed before. So while you wouldn't replace all 1.2 million workers, the number left will be a fraction of what they are now.

Electronics line production robots are not the massive robots you see in the classic automotive manufacturing clips, nor I, Robot-esque humanoids - robotics can be very compact in a production line, so deploying 1 million robots is not outside the realm of possibility. In fact if the processes allow, fabricationand assembly can be broken down into sub-processes now all done by a single human. Therefore there is no case for a one-to-one substitution for the existing workers. And using robots to do highly repetitive processes frees humans to do the evaluative processes - fewer are required but processing that requires higher-level reasoning or abstraction will remain in human hands (inspection, Q/A, etc). In which case the claim for a million robots is entirely plausible and justified.

I've installed many production robots and stick by my statement. You don't go from 10,000 to 300,000 in a year.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

There is this flawed notion that since we will all be put out of the factories, humanity is doomed.

May I remind the audience that agriculture accounts for less than 2% of workforce in most developed countries, and that this number was about 95% three hundred years ago? Or should I remind the audience of the huge percentage of people being offered a job in the industry, a number that is now completely dwarfed by the services?

What this revolution means is very simple. Much of the cost in these devices is still labor. If labor "stops" existing in these factories, the devices' cost will fall down as well. Distribution and payment, etc., will also fall down with all this automation. The end result, if all else was equal (and of course it is not but let's suppose), is that an iPad that now costs 200+ bucks to produce would cost 100. Or less.

That's the future. People will have less jobs and less money to buy things. But things will also cost less. The future is delationary.

....sorry, much greater paradigm shifts this time. unless, that is, humans augment themselves at a equal or greater rate to the advance of purely digital/mechanical technology....

....we're talking the possibility of an evolutionary displacement at a previously unacheivable rate here..... ...which will in turn displace itself with a higher sentience level at a rate approximating Moore's law, i.e., say, doubling every two years.....

I've installed many production robots and stick by my statement. You don't go from 10,000 to 300,000 in a year.

OK, kudos on the background, but having observed the construction of new production facilities and mod-out of existing ones with new lines, it is not outside the realm of possibility, and probably likely. So you and I will have to agree to disagree. As FoxConn builds out new operations globally (like Brazil, yes?) new robotics can be implemented at build-out, and new lines can be added into existing facilities that are fully roboticized along side existing lines. In fact robotic lines, depending on the processes involved (for example we both know that fabrication robotics for electronics take less space than assembly robotics), and that depending on sub-processing less advanced, cheaper robotics can be used. So from a cost perspective as well as from a fottprint perspective the assertion is supportable.

If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one

The same question would have been asked many, many times during the Industrial Revolution.

I don't think so because the Industrial Revolution was basically replacing farm workers who were being replaced by machines to keep up food production. We went from about 80% of the population that was necessary to grow 100% of the food to less than 20% .... because of the use of machines.

What allowed that to happen was the production of "new technology", .... cars, planes, trains, oil refineries, etc. .... that swallowed up the displaced farmers .... so, unlike today, jobs weren't disappearing but instead were increasing.

The big difference today, as I see it, is that most "new production" can be done by computers and machines ... but where are the jobs coming from that require humans in those large numbers. A disturbing trend, for me, appears to be more humans involved with moving money around via the "investment industry" .... which is nothing more than finding ways to "move money" from our pockets to theirs.

Where we once produced "things" .... we now just produce ideas and schemes on how to make more money. That is why I am such an Apple "fan boy". They are one of the few companies left that focuses on products .... rather than on profits.

Apple, bigger than Google, √ ..... bigger than Microsoft, √ The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.